Re: [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines
Date
Msg-id 6162.1063337356@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> Yes, we could do just the configure warning, then plaster tests into the
> port files to try to hit all the opteron/itanium cases.  I am a little
> concerned that this might throw up a bunch of problem cases that we will
> patching for a while.

Probably so --- but we'd only be breaking new platforms that people are
starting to use, not old ones that might not be getting tested
regularly.

Understand that I'm not dead set against applying this patch for 7.4.
(On a code-cleanliness point of view I favor it.)  What I want is some
open discussion about the risks and benefits before we decide.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines